Yazdani, M; Abdi, M R; Kumar, N; Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, M and Chan, F T S (2019) Improved decision model for evaluating risks in construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 145(5): 04019024, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The paper develops an innovative risk evaluation methodology to address the challenges of multicriteria decision-making problem of project evaluation and selection. The methodology considers the fuzzy analytic network process (FANP) to incorporate the interdependencies of different risk factors, and failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) to conduct the rating analysis of projects to develop the decision matrix. Finally, evaluation based on the distance from the average solution compares alternative projects and reports the optimal solution. The proposed approach allows project managers to engage in the evaluation process and to use fuzzy linguistic values in the assessment process. A case study from the construction sector is selected to verify the efficacy of the proposed approach over other popular approaches in the literature.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction projects; failure mode and effect analysis; fuzzy analytical network process; multicriteria decisions; risk assessment |
| Index terms: | construction sector, methodology, decision-making, construction project, project manager, case study, failure mode, project evaluation, analytic network process, risk factor, risk assessment |
| Subjects: | value management, reliability engineering, profession, data collection methods, industry analysis, decision-making and optimization, environmental hazards, decision analysis, production management, financial risk, research methods |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Cost Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here